Elephants, Ethics, and Ecotourism in Thailand

During the summer following my sophomore year at Dickinson, I was lucky enough to serve as the elephant department intern at the Rosamond Gifford Zoo in Syracuse, NY.  An Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) accredited institution, the Asian elephant program at the zoo focuses on public education, breeding, and conservation of this incredible species.  When I interviewed for the position, I was asked a question, “what is the difference between animal rights and animal welfare?”.  This is a muddy question, the source of much argument and debate throughout the zookeeping and animal care communities.

Asian elephant mother and calf. Photo by Katie Hollamby, courtesy of Pexels.

In a new study published in the vegan-adjacent journal, Animal Sentience, researchers address the state of Asian elephant captivity and conservation in Thailand (Baker and Winkler 2020).  The current elephant population in Thailand is less than 10,000, with the worldwide population estimated between 40,000 and 50,000 (Choudry et. al 2008).  Of the elephants remaining in Thailand, the majority fall into the “domesticated” group- an elephant which has been either captured and tamed or captive-bred.  This definition of domestication is specific elephants, and does not follow the usual scientific or connotative meaning of domestication.  The authors of this study argue that dividing the elephant population into two sects, domesticated and wild, perpetuates and normalizes the existence of elephants in the human-domestic sphere, and that in addition to restoring individual wellbeing, rehabilitation will be an important aid in rewilding elephants (Baker and Winkler 2020). It should be noted that this study leans in the direction of wild populations, aiming to provide an economically, culturally, and ecologically viable alternative to elephant tourism.

Elephants carry extreme cultural and political significance in Thailand, as they do across their native ranges.  In the 20th century, domesticated elephants were employed primary as beasts of burden in the agriculture and logging sectors until the ban of logging in 1989.  Until this point, elephants were owned and cared for by mahouts belonging to the Karen peoples and other hilltribes, who were skilled tradespeople who underwent many years of apprenticeship and training in order to pursue this path.  The logging ban suddenly left mahouts and elephants without a job, and more importantly, without a source of income to fund the 150 kg vegetarian appetite of an adult elephant per day.  As a result, elephants began to occupy a new importance in the tourism sphere, with tourism facilities employing 948 elephants across Thailand by 2001 (Baker and Winkler 2020).

Tourist poses with Asian elephant. Photo by blacktator, courtesy of Pexels

The authors of this study argue that the current conservation status of Asian elephants in Thailand does not meet the potential given a significant movement towards rewilding the elephant population.  The process of rewilding seeks to rehabilitate captive individuals to then be released and integrated into wild populations, with overarching actions to increase habitat and coexistance with humans while decreasing the amount of human disturbance to the total elephant population.  Little evidence is available to show any positive effect from the elephant tourism industry, as the number of elephants in captivity has doubled since the enacting of the logging ban in 1989.  The authors suggest using the “3R” method of conservation, Rescue/Rehabilitate/Rewild, with considerable effort to employ indigenous conservation management techniques and return economic advantage to the mahout population in the cases of elephants which must remain captive.

The most successful conservation projects, these authors argue, are those which recognize the intertwined nature of human and other animals in our modern world.  Rewilding projects in Thailand offer an opportunity to restore elephant habitat and populations, while simultaneously supporting the culture and livelihoods of Karen and other mahouts.  Without an intersectional approach, the maintenance of elephants in captivity for tourism purposes will likely result in their disappearance from the wild.

References

Baker, L., & Winkler, R. (2020). Asian elephant rescue, rehabilitation and rewilding. Animal Sentience, 5(28), 1.